Author
Topic: Alternative CC idea (Read 3409 times)

Let's face it, Adobe will most likely stick with CC. Though they may modify the program a bit.

Here is my idea for a more photographer friendly program. Perhaps they will see and use a few ideas.

1. If you are current CS6 user, you can subscribe to CC at a reasonable charge ($10/month) and stop the monthly fee and continue to use the latest version. If you want to get back on this program, you need to pay a percent of the monthly fees you skipped (if < 6 months 100% of this monthly fees, else 60-80%).

2. If you are user of older version of CS6, your monthly fee would be higher (perhaps $15/month with 1-2 year minimum) or you could buy up to the current version.

3. Anyone else, pay $700 and enter program 1 or pay $20/month and have access only when you subscribe.

This protects current CS6 and older version users but give adobe the income stream they need.

Besides if I only need PS for 12 months, I can rent it for $240 versus buying it for $700. Good deal for those who need PS for a short period.

Logged

canon rumors FORUM

Unfortunately, no matter how low of a monthly fee you suggest you will never convince the contingent of users who refuse to accept "renting" software. You see, they believe that they "owned" the software when they bought in the past and could use it forever and ever and ever to infinity and beyond. They feel that "Adobe owns you" once you sign up to a subscription model because if you ever stop paying you can't access your old PSD files. And they also fear that once everyone accepts the subscription model Adobe will jack up the prices on us.

Unfortunately, no matter how low of a monthly fee you suggest you will never convince the contingent of users who refuse to accept "renting" software. You see, they believe that they "owned" the software when they bought in the past and could use it forever and ever and ever to infinity and beyond. They feel that "Adobe owns you" once you sign up to a subscription model because if you ever stop paying you can't access your old PSD files. And they also fear that once everyone accepts the subscription model Adobe will jack up the prices on us.

NO - what I propose if you lay out $700 for PS, you own a perpetual license. You pay a monthly support fee rather than an annual or 18 month upgrade fee. You can stop paying and keep using the s/w just to be back on the support service you need to pay missed months (either in full if short term or at discount if longer).

Unfortunately, no matter how low of a monthly fee you suggest you will never convince the contingent of users who refuse to accept "renting" software. You see, they believe that they "owned" the software when they bought in the past and could use it forever and ever and ever to infinity and beyond. They feel that "Adobe owns you" once you sign up to a subscription model because if you ever stop paying you can't access your old PSD files. And they also fear that once everyone accepts the subscription model Adobe will jack up the prices on us.

NO - what I propose if you lay out $700 for PS, you own a perpetual license. You pay a monthly support fee rather than an annual or 18 month upgrade fee. You can stop paying and keep using the s/w just to be back on the support service you need to pay missed months (either in full if short term or at discount if longer).

YES - all the complainers already own CS5/6 and don't want to pay a single dime on a monthly basis until such time as Adobe releases a new version that has new features/improvements that they deem worthy of their dollahs. Your suggestion is a noble attempt at finding a middle ground but it still means that one has to keep paying monthly to get bug fixes, updates to Camera Raw for new bodies, etc.

And it wouldn't work for Adobe anyway because everyone would just suspend their monthly account once they felt they had a version that was updated and "working for them". They wouldn't turn it back on for 12-18-24-36 months when they needed an update. Under your proposal, the fee they would pay to "catch up" would be less than what Adobe was charging for full version upgrades (for example $10/month x 18 months x 80% = $144 < $199) so Adobe is worse off.

Unfortunately, no matter how low of a monthly fee you suggest you will never convince the contingent of users who refuse to accept "renting" software. You see, they believe that they "owned" the software when they bought in the past and could use it forever and ever and ever to infinity and beyond. They feel that "Adobe owns you" once you sign up to a subscription model because if you ever stop paying you can't access your old PSD files. And they also fear that once everyone accepts the subscription model Adobe will jack up the prices on us.

This guy is genius. Adobe will lock you down, adobe will raise the prices and adobe will own you.

Unfortunately, no matter how low of a monthly fee you suggest you will never convince the contingent of users who refuse to accept "renting" software. You see, they believe that they "owned" the software when they bought in the past and could use it forever and ever and ever to infinity and beyond. They feel that "Adobe owns you" once you sign up to a subscription model because if you ever stop paying you can't access your old PSD files. And they also fear that once everyone accepts the subscription model Adobe will jack up the prices on us.

This guy is genius. Adobe will lock you down, adobe will raise the prices and adobe will own you.

Exactly. Adobe's only motivation behind CC is maximizing profits and reducing expenses while trapping customers into a system in which they're dependency will grow over time. Thus, Adobe will be able to enact arbitrary price increases when necessary in order to meet or exceed their financial projections knowing that customers will be unlikely/unable to reject the increase and stop subscribing. It's a brilliant business plan that gives them much more control of their revenue stream. I'm sure they will justify each price increase with some sort of added value. How else does a large, publicly traded corporation continue to grow quarter to quarter, year in and year out, when the income of practically everyone on the planet is flat or decreasing?